HF2906 establishes a regulated psilocybin therapeutic use program in Minnesota for adults age 21 and older who have a qualifying medical condition and obtain physician certification. The bill creates a framework for enrollment, informed consent, health screening, renewal, patient registries, and supervised administration sessions. It defines key program roles and entities, including registered patients, registered facilitators, registered suppliers/cultivators, testing facilities, treatment facilities, and a Psychedelic Medicine Advisory Committee. The program would be administered by the commissioner of health, with significant operational oversight assigned through an interagency agreement with the Office of Cannabis Management.
The bill also directs the Department of Health to adopt rules on qualifying conditions, testing standards, facilitator and cultivator qualifications, screening tools, and program operations, with expedited rulemaking available for early rule adoption. It requires data collection and evaluation, public education, first responder training, and allows research support for additional therapeutic uses of psilocybin. The bill sets a phased rollout, with patient applications beginning January 1, 2027, facilitator applications beginning October 1, 2026, and an initial program capped at 1,000 patients for the first three years before evaluation.
HF2906 amends Minnesota’s controlled substances schedules to remove psilocybin and psilocin from Schedule I and place them in Schedule IV, while leaving the therapeutic program’s protections and restrictions in place. It also creates civil and criminal protections for registered participants and providers acting within the program, including limits on forfeiture, registry access, and use of registry data in criminal proceedings. At the same time, it imposes penalties for diversion, false statements to law enforcement, and unauthorized transfer or sale outside the program.
The bill’s impact on state law is broad: it would create a new chapter-level regulatory structure for therapeutic psilocybin use, alter controlled-substance classification, and add employment, housing, education, and custody protections for lawful participation. It also authorizes fees, appropriates state money for implementation, and allows civil actions for violations of the anti-discrimination provisions. Affected parties would include patients with qualifying conditions, physicians, mental health professionals, cultivators, testing labs, treatment facilities, state agencies, employers, landlords, schools, and law enforcement.
No committee transcript or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded public debate or roll-call sentiment to summarize. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed as a tightly regulated medical access program rather than broad decriminalization, with strong emphasis on safety, screening, data collection, and oversight. The main points of likely contention are the legalization of psilocybin for therapeutic use, the removal of psilocybin from Schedule I, the scope of civil and employment protections, and concerns about diversion, public safety, and federal law conflicts.
The bill would create new Minnesota Statutes chapter 152 provisions governing a psilocybin therapeutic use program and amend section 152.02 to reclassify psilocybin and psilocin from Schedule I to Schedule IV. It would establish licensing, registration, data privacy, enforcement, and anti-discrimination rules for patients, facilitators, suppliers, testing facilities, and treatment facilities, while also authorizing rulemaking, fees, appropriations, and an advisory committee. The bill would affect health care practitioners, mental health professionals, state agencies, employers, landlords, schools, law enforcement, and participants in the program by creating new rights, duties, and penalties.
Because no committee discussion or votes were provided, there is no recorded legislative sentiment to report. From the bill’s structure, the proposal reflects a cautious, regulated approach that appears supportive of therapeutic psilocybin access while building in screening, oversight, and penalties for misuse. The overall tone of the bill is reform-oriented but safety-focused.
The most likely points of contention are whether psilocybin should be removed from Schedule I and made available for therapeutic use, how broad the qualifying medical conditions should be, and whether the state should create employment, housing, custody, and education protections for participants. Additional concerns may include the adequacy of safeguards against diversion, the role of the Office of Cannabis Management, privacy of patient registry data, and potential conflicts with federal law. Supporters would likely emphasize treatment access, research, and harm reduction, while opponents would likely focus on public safety, regulatory burden, and federal illegality.